re: Ideas and Strategies that Smart Football Coaches should employ...

quote:

---

Another one that grinds my gears is when a team is down by 8 points in the 4th quarter, they play as if they're down 1 possession. Considering the 2pt conversion success rate, there's a better than 50% chance you're actually down 2 possessions, so there should be more sense of urgency.

Along the same lines, this one is a bit more rare, when a team is down by 15 points somewhat late in the 4th quarter, they almost always kick the extra point to go down 8, or "1 possession". Why wouldn't you go for 2 on the 1st TD, so now you know immediately if you'll be down by 9 or 7? More information earlier is better, and you could then plan the rest of the game accordingly, which is very different being down 7 as opposed to 9.

---

Wish I could give you two up votes. Couldn't agree more.

quote:

---

Another one that grinds my gears is when a team is down by 8 points in the 4th quarter, they play as if they're down 1 possession. Considering the 2pt conversion success rate, there's a better than 50% chance you're actually down 2 possessions, so there should be more sense of urgency.

Along the same lines, this one is a bit more rare, when a team is down by 15 points somewhat late in the 4th quarter, they almost always kick the extra point to go down 8, or "1 possession". Why wouldn't you go for 2 on the 1st TD, so now you know immediately if you'll be down by 9 or 7? More information earlier is better, and you could then plan the rest of the game accordingly, which is very different being down 7 as opposed to 9.

---

the theory is to extend the game. If you're down 15 and score with 4 mins left and you go for 2 and fail, the game is essentially over still down 2 scores. Keep it within 1 possession and try to stay in the game as long as possible. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying there's a long believed theory and most aren't willing to buck conventional thinking bc if it backfires, you look really stoopid

quote:

---

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying there's a long believed theory and most aren't willing to buck conventional thinking bc if it backfires, you look really stoopid

---

Didn't this happen to LA Tech or ULM recently? Maybe last season?

quote:

---

But, if they kick the extra point, go down by 8, then(based on my 1st point), play it as if they're down 2 possesions, that would work as well.

---

in modern day football, if you're in a one score game, there's more to just scoring as fast as you can. The offense has to play defense in a way and try to exhaust as much clock as possible. The giants scored last night with 3 mins left in the game to go ahead by 4. I turned to my bro and said "there's no question the cowboys score here, question is if they let them score quick enough to give themselves a chance to score again." Cowboys get a TD with about a minutes left, giants didn't have enough time left to get a get tying FG attempt. Again, I'm not saying your theories are wrong, I'm saying there's a reason coaches think and strategize a certain, proven way.


Like the idiots who always think you should go for it on 4th and short-ish. Sounds great and everything, and it often works, but when it doesn't you give a short field to the other team. Fans don't have to answer those press conference questions from their couch. Everyone is super brave with other people's careers in their hands

quote:

---

Along the same lines, this one is a bit more rare, when a team is down by 15 points somewhat late in the 4th quarter, they almost always kick the extra point to go down 8, or "1 possession". Why wouldn't you go for 2 on the 1st TD, so now you know immediately if you'll be down by 9 or 7? More information earlier is better, and you could then plan the rest of the game accordingly, which is very different being down 7 as opposed to 9.

---

What they really should do is line up for 1 the first time, and fake it for two. You'd catch the other team sleeping for sure.

quote:

---

Too many coaches coach to save their job and not do what's best for the team. You can't always blame them, but it's still annoying.

---

guys coach 20 years to become a head coach. They're not willing to risk their careers on schticky, video game strategy. They're making the most money they ever have, and they want to keep that job for as long as possible. One way is to not give me ammo against you. They have kids in private school and mortgages. They're in the business of keeping their jobs, not dissimilar to everyone else on the planet


And everyone uses belichick as a guy who bucks convention, but he only started doing it when he had a couple Super Bowls and some job security. There's been few stars who have built a career by being unconventional like a chip Kelly. His outside the box thinking is very rare. Most are goof balls like jerry glanville and get exiled for being a weirdo

quote:

---

quote:

---

in modern day football, if you're in a one score game, there's more to just scoring as fast as you can. The offense has to play defense in a way and try to exhaust as much clock as possible

---

why would you want to exhause as much as clock as possible in a situation where more than 50% of the time you're down 2 possessions? That doesn't make sense, logically speaking.

---

i was referring to your point that even if you kick the PAT to close the gap to 8 points, you should still play as if youre down 2 scores. my reply to that is, then what? say you score super fast and get the 2 point conversion. now you left a minute or 2 for the other team to score. lets say you score fast and miss the 2 point conversion. now youre down to an obvious onside kick, not good odds. i just dont see the point that portion of your theory. the truth is, if youre down 15 with 6 mins left in the game, the deck is stacked against you, youre likely playing a better team, and these scenarios are really just degrees of bad in terms of odds to win

quote:

---

quote:

---

I'm saying there's a reason coaches think and strategize a certain, proven way.

---

I'm not so sure this has been proven, by any stretch.

---

huh? every superbowl winning coach has used the proven strategy to win. generally speaking, if youre a high end team, you dont need to resort to gimmicks to win. as much as i like chip kelly and his outside the box thinking, he hasnt won dick yet, so until his theories lead to winning a superbowl or very sustained success, they are exponentially less proven ways to win

quote:

---

Are coaches coaching to put their team in the best possible position to win, or are they coaching to just try and save their jobs?

---

i dont know what industry you work in, but are you trying to overhaul the way things have been successfully done for decades? or are you just trying to maximize what you can with the current template and willing to ride things out that way?

How about not wasting a timeout in the first or third quarter to save five yards on a delay of game call, when it's second and six?? This aways gets me